I think I'm leaning towards the 2nd revision. I just dont think they'd revise it unless they were improving something.

I do not think the differences are worth an extra 300 bucks or so from a used rev1 to a new rev2. Both are the best around and you cant go wrong with either one. People love the rev1 so much as to merit thousands or replies in this thread alone, its an incredible set no matter what anyone says.

The rev1 can be had for 750-800 used commonly found here on head fi, a new rev2 is at least a grand shipped depending on what box and band you choose. I felt the differences not to my liking over the rev1 or worth the extra few hundred, but that does not mean they arent present. There are audible differences

R1 v R2: apart from the frequency boost around 2khz (in this area I preferred the 'naturalness' of the R1), the sound of the R2 is IMO significantly 'tighter' and more detailed. The faster driver gives body and space to quiet background sounds, especially noticeable in symphonic and acoustic recordings.

Well now, that's a moot point. It's been suggested, by me among others, that Audeze went looking for new materials after the several failures of a few months back and came up with what is now the rev2, not by design but by accident. Alternatively it could be suggested, given the original wording on the website, that they tweaked the rev1 to be more in line with other company's flagships--IOW, not because they thought it sounded better but because they considered the sound more commercial.

I plump for the first theory myself, as it makes complete sense. It seems to me just too much of a coincidence that they come up a new version so soon after having a number of component failures.

FYI...Audeze has said so much (dated July 3, 2011):

"Why change it suddenly ?

A couple of reasons. We have developed new diaphragm material that offered several benefits over the existing material. We decided to pass along the improvements to customers. The issues we had with some older stock gave us the impetus to move to the new diaphragm quicker than expected."

That said, my R1s were from last September....long before the issues with the last run of the R1 drivers.

A couple of reasons. We have developed new diaphragm material that offered several benefits over the existing material. We decided to pass along the improvements to customers. The issues we had with some older stock gave us the impetus to move to the new diaphragm quicker than expected."

That said, my R1s were from last September....long before the issues with the last run of the R1 drivers.

Could it be this:

"Advanced thin film:

Wisdom Audio is one of the first companies to abandon PET (Mylar™) in favor of more advanced materials that have superior dynamic and temperature
characteristics. Of these, the polyimide family of polymers is the most promising, some of which can handle temperatures in excess of 725°F (385°C) —

far in excess of what even the most advanced adhesives could hope to withstand. Fortunately, this is also a temperature range unlikely to be experienced

by any planar magnetic driver, except perhaps in the most demanding professional applications."

Wisdom Audio is one of the first companies to abandon PET (Mylar™) in favor of more advanced materials that have superior dynamic and temperature
characteristics. Of these, the polyimide family of polymers is the most promising, some of which can handle temperatures in excess of 725°F (385°C) —

far in excess of what even the most advanced adhesives could hope to withstand. Fortunately, this is also a temperature range unlikely to be experienced

by any planar magnetic driver, except perhaps in the most demanding professional applications."

I agree especially being in the flexible printed circuit board business...polyaminde materials are the basis of our constructions for static and dynamic applications, but it's been around for years and years and used in many different applications (consumer, military, aerospace) with great results. As well, LCP (Liquid Crystal Polymer) is another material that shows great promise in the industry.

Running at room temperature, I don't think we need to worry about high temp applications as you said.

Did you guys ever come across with a idea that LCD-2 might be a little recessed in the mids? I went over to a friend's house cz the Irene and spent some time with his rig. We did have some fun and laughed at how I disappointed at the Irene cz I was kinda hopping no work for Monday lol. Anyway, on his SS amp, the LCD-2 seems has very very slightly recessed mids.....

If you add all the rev.1 owners that had to honestly answer that they don't know because they haven't heard the rev.2 yet to the ones that prefer the rev.1 it's about even. Big if though.

Yep. A lot of rev.1 only owners have been quite vocal in their preference. If you subtracted those from such a poll, I suspect you'd find the result skew in favor of the rev.2. I've followed this thread closely since obtaining my rev.2 and I can't recall ever reading someone with rev.2 only experience state they prefer it to the rev.1, based on forum posts and assumptions. The same can't be said for the inverse. Having said that, such a poll is ultimately pointless. Basing a decision on such numbers is absurd.

The beneficial thing to gather from the meandering posts the last few weeks is that there are people who have heard both and still prefer the original. There are also people who prefer the new version, and I find it's these people who've taken the time to explain why, often stressing the strengths of both. The impression I get is that the divide isn't as wide as it appears between the two revisions. Unfortunately, fear-mongering has persisted from the usual suspects and the valid points that may assist someone in making a decision are either buried, or exaggerated and distorted beyond recognition.